Gay Marriage

by Nathan Kistler

The question of whether society should allow gay people to marry their partners has arisen; Partly because it’s an election year and the social issues are standing points for many candidates, and partly because the mayor of San Francisco has begun to issue marriage licenses to same sex partners. There are three major camps when it comes to the decision of whether gays should be allowed to marry: those who oppose, those who favor and those who will stipulate that gay unions be titled something other than “marriage.” Should we allow gay marriage to be acceptable? I believe the answer is yes.

One major point supporting the allowance of marriages between gay couples is the simple fact that it doesn’t harm others. If gay people start getting married, the average person wouldn’t be hurt. One who is opposed to gays marrying might argue that if gay people are allowed to marry, the institution of marriage won’t have as much meaning since there are fewer restrictions on it, but those who argue this point fail to point out that even if this practice starts to “weaken marriage” it still does not hurt them. One should only be concerned with one’s own marital status and not others. Allowing gay people to marry does not infringe upon the ability of heterosexual people to form traditional marriages. Besides, those who argue this point also neglect the fact that it is heterosexual marriages that fail so often, as shown by the high divorce rate in America.

Many who oppose gay marriages argue that the intent of marriage is to establish families and ensure new generations are produced. It is argued that child-producing marriages are the cornerstone to society and this is why government provisions for marriages are in place because of this. Gay people are naturally incapable of producing offspring, but if this argument is used, then infertile or older couples should not have the ability to marry. This argument also is an argument that promotes a government social objective instead of protecting the freedoms of a minority population. Allowing homosexual marriage accomplishes a basic ideal of government: protecting the rights of the minority while respecting the will of the majority.

Those who propose allowing homosexuals to enter a union, but it would be called something besides “marriage,” must consider that separate is not equal. In our country’s past, our citizens were racially segregated on the theory that separate was equal, but this was not the case. This is not to say that having separate but equal institutions would automatically result in inequity, but we should not leave to chance issues of civil liberty. Marriage between gay couples would be the modern day equivalent of “jumping the broom,” if it were not titled marriage. Additionally, gay people in general have not decided that they want civil unions, they are asking for the ability to marry. Allowing marriage between same sex couples fully resolves the issue instead of keeping it up for debate.

Americans have prided themselves for being a progressive nation, and allowing an amendment to withhold the long-standing tradition of marriage, to a minority is discrimination. Marriage for same sex couples seems to be very likely to be recognized by society in the near future, and there are good reasons to support this decision.